After threatening U.S., North Korea turns wrath on South

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• NEW: A Chinese state-run newspaper warns North Korea over nuclear test


• Pyongyang threatens "physical counter-measures" against South Korea


• It says it will act if South Korea takes a "direct part" in new U.N. sanctions


• A day earlier, the North said a new nuclear test would be part of its fight against the U.S.

Seoul, South Korea (CNN) -- In its latest bout of saber-rattling, North Korea on Friday warned of the possibility of "strong physical counter-measures" against South Korea in relation to tougher sanctions imposed this week by the United Nations.

The threat against South Korea came a day after the North said it would carry out a new nuclear test and more long-range rocket launches as part of a new phase of confrontation with the United States.

The statement Friday from North Korea's Committee for Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland said it would take action against South Korea if it "takes a direct part" in the U.N. sanctions.

The South Korean Unification Ministry declined to comment specifically on the new threats from Pyongyang. It reiterated its stance that North Korea should refrain from further provocations.

The two Koreas are technically still at war from the all-out conflict between them in the 1950s. Smaller scale clashes have occurred since then, most recently in November 2010 when North Korea shelled a South Korean island, killing several people.

South Korea and the United States are often the focus of menacing language from Pyongyang, but the latest U.N. sanctions, a response to a long-range rocket launched last month by the North, appear to have prompted a ratcheting up of the threats.

A displeased Chinese editorial

At the same time, North Korea's strong words and vow to conduct a third nuclear test -- previous ones took place in 2006 and 2009 -- appear to be testing the patience of its main ally, China, which voted in favor of the U.N. sanctions this week.

An editorial published Friday in the English-language edition of the state-run Chinese newspaper Global Times struck a displeased tone over Pyongyang's comments a day earlier.

"China's role and position are clear when discussing North Korea issue in the U.N. Security Council," the editorial said. "If North Korea engages in further nuclear tests, China will not hesitate to reduce its assistance to North Korea."

That prospect carries weight, since North Korea's impoverished economy relies heavily on China to stay afloat.

Global Times, whose editorial line often but not always reflects official Chinese policy, made it clear, though, that Beijing isn't about to cut Pyongyang loose.

"If the U.S., Japan and South Korea promote extreme U.N. sanctions on North Korea, China will resolutely stop them and force them to amend these draft resolutions," the editorial said.

Global Times noted that Beijing had put "a lot of effort into amendments" to the resolution approved by the Security Council this week.

"It seems that North Korea does not appreciate China's efforts," it said. "It criticized China without explicitly naming it in its statement yesterday."

The newspaper was referring to a passage in the controversial North Korean statement Thursday that said that "big countries, which are obliged to take the lead in building a fair world order, are abandoning without hesitation even elementary principle, under the influence of the U.S. arbitrary and high-handed practices."

The Global Times editorial also suggested that North Korea shouldn't rank too highly among China's priorities.

"China hopes for a stable peninsula, but it's not the end of the world if there's trouble there," it said, referring to the Korean peninsula that comprises North and South Korea. "This should be the baseline of China's position."

The Chinese Foreign Ministry on Thursday had urged North Korea and the West to "keep calm, remain cautious and refrain from any action that might escalate the situation in the region."

U.S. concerned but prepared

U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said Thursday there are no "outward indications" that North Korea is about to conduct a nuclear test, but he admitted it would be hard to determine that in advance.

"They have the capability, frankly, to conduct these tests in a way that makes it very difficult to determine whether or not they are doing it," he said in a Pentagon press conference.

"We are very concerned with North Korea's continuing provocative behavior," Panetta said, but he added that the United States is "fully prepared" to deal with any provocations.

CNN's K.J. Kwon reported from Seoul, and Jethro Mullen reported and wrote from Hong Kong. CNN's Jaime A. FlorCruz in Beijing contributed to this report.

Read More..

Battery expert: "I would not fly in a Dreamliner"

(CBS News) WASHINGTON - Investigators say they still don't know what caused batteries to burn in two Boeing 787 Dreamliners, and until they figure that out and how to fix the problem, none of the planes will be allowed to fly.

More than any other plane, the Dreamliner relies on lithium ion batteries to help power its advanced electrical system. They're lighter and more powerful than older battery types, but they contain a highly flammable liquid electrolyte.

U.S. officials defend handling of 787 mishaps

Boeing 787 probe turns to battery companies

Boeing plans to carry on with Dreamliner production

Federal investigators are examining the disassembled battery from the 787 that caught fire in Boston January 7, spewing molten electrolyte.

George Blomgren worked for Eveready, a batteries and flashlights company, for 40 years. He says lithium ion batteries are bundled together for the 787, and that increases the risk.

"These fires burn at very high temperatures, so they are just very dangerous fires," he said.

George Blomgren, a battery expert for Eveready

/

CBS News

The Boston fire, and the burned-out battery on a Dreamliner in Japan, is not the first time lithium ion batteries have caused problems.

In 2011, a Chevy Volt lithium ion battery was damaged in a crash test. Three weeks later, it burst into flames. Chevrolet installed a number of fixes to prevent fires.

Safety features also were added to lithium ion batteries in some cell phones and laptops after 56 million were recalled for risk of overheating and exploding.

Boeing says lithium ion batteries "best met the performance and design objectives of the 787" and "Based on everything we know at this point, we have not changed our evaluation."

Blomgren considers the safety of lithium ion batteries on planes questionable.

"From what I know about incidents, I would not fly in a Dreamliner tomorrow. I just wouldn't feel that it was appropriate or safe," Blomgren said.

Many experts believe in the promise of lithium ion batteries, including for airlines, but they just aren't sure its safety has been perfected.

Read More..

It's Official: Women Will Serve in Combat

Women will soon be able to serve in combat, as things officially changed with the stroke of a pen today at the Pentagon.

At a joint news conference, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Charman Gen. Martin Dempsey signed a memorandum rolling back a 1994 directive prohibiting women from doing so.

"They serve, they're wounded, and they die right next to each other," Panetta said of women and men in the military. "The time has come to recognize that reality.

"If they're willing to put their lives on the line, then we need to recognize that they deserve a chance," Panetta said, noting that he wants his own granddaughters and grandsons to have the same opportunities in their lives and careers.

The change won't be immediate, however. While Panetta announced that thousands of new positions will now be open to women, he has asked the military branches to submit plans by May on how to integrate women into combat operations. He set a January 2016 deadline for branches to implement the changes, giving military services time to seek waivers for certain jobs.

Both Panetta and Dempsey said they believe the move will strengthen the U.S. military force.

Soaring With the First Woman Fighter Jet Commander Watch Video

Florida Judge Puts Debra Lafave Back on Probation After Year Off Watch Video

"Ultimately, we are acting to strengthen the armed forces," Dempsey said. "We will extend opportunities to women in a way that maintains readiness, morale and unit cohesion."

Women have already served in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, as ABC News' Martha Raddatz and Elizabeth Gorman reported in 2009: Prohibited from serving in roles "whose primary mission is to engage in direct combat on the ground," women in support roles, nonetheless, served in support roles on the frontlines, where they have fought, been wounded and died.

Women have also flown combat missions since 1993 and have served on submarines since 2010.

Panetta noted that 152 women have died serving in the U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan. Dempsey said he realized a change was inevitable when he noticed two female turret gunners protecting a senior military officer.

"It's clear to all of us that women are contributing in unprecedented ways to the military's mission of defending the nation," Panetta said. "Women represent 15 percent of the force of over 200,000 [and] are serving in a growing number of critical roles on and off the battlefield.

"I've gone to Bethesda to visit wounded warriors, and I've gone to Arlington to bury our dead. There's no distincton."

Panetta and Dempsey said President Obama supported the move, while warning them to maintain military readiness as they considered the change.

Obama hailed the move in a written statement

"Today, by moving to open more military positions -- including ground combat units -- to women, our armed forces have taken another historic step toward harnessing the talents and skills of all our citizens," he said.

"This milestone reflects the courageous and patriotic service of women through more than two centuries of American history and the indispensable role of women in today's military," Obama said.

Read More..

Neanderthal cloning? Pure fantasy

A display of a reconstruction of a Neanderthal man and boy at the Museum for Prehistory in Eyzies-de-Tayac, France.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Arthur Caplan: It would be unethical to try and clone a Neanderthal baby


• Caplan: Downsides include a good chance of producing a baby that is seriously deformed


• He says the future belongs to what we can do to genetically engineer and control microbes


• Caplan: Microbes can make clean fuel, suck up carbon dioxide, clean fat out of arteries

Editor's note: Arthur Caplan is the Drs. William F and Virginia Connolly Mitty professor and director of the Division of Bioethics at New York University Langone Medical Center.

(CNN) -- So now we know -- there won't be a Neanderthal moving into your neighborhood.

Despite a lot of frenzied attention to the intentionally provocative suggestion by a renowned Harvard scientist that new genetic technology makes it possible to splice together a complete set of Neanderthal genes, find an adventurous surrogate mother and use cloning to gin up a Neanderthal baby -- it ain't gonna happen anytime soon.

Nor should it. But there are plenty of other things in the works involving genetic engineering that do merit serious ethical discussion at the national and international levels.

Arthur Caplan

Some thought that the Harvard scientist, George Church, was getting ready to put out an ad seeking volunteer surrogate moms to bear a 35,000-year-old, long-extinct Neanderthal baby. Church had to walk his comments back and note that he was just speculating, not incubating.

Still cloning carries so much mystery and Hollywood glamour thanks to movies such as "Jurassic Park," "The Boys From Brazil" and "Never Let Me Go" that a two-day eruption of the pros and cons of making Neanderthals ensued. That was not necessary. It would be unethical to try and clone a Neanderthal baby.

Why? Because there is no obvious reason to do so. There is no pressing need or remarkable benefit to undertaking such a project. At best it might shed some light on the biology and behavior of a distant ancestor. At worst it would be nothing more than the ultimate reality television show exploitation: An "Octomom"-like surrogate raises a caveman child -- tune in next week to see what her new boyfriend thinks when she tells him that there is a tiny addition in her life and he carries a small club and a tiny piece of flint to sleep with him.

The downsides of trying to clone a Neanderthal include a good chance of killing it, producing a baby that is seriously deformed, producing a baby that lacks immunity to infectious diseases and foods that we have gotten used to, an inability to know what environment to create to permit the child to flourish and a complete lack of understanding of what sort of behavior is "normal" or "appropriate" for such a long-extinct cousin hominid of ours.

When weighed against the risks and the harm that most likely would be done, it would take a mighty big guarantee of benefit to justify this cloning experiment. I am willing to venture that the possible benefit will never, ever reach the point where this list of horrible likely downsides could be overcome.

Even justifying trying to resurrect a woolly mammoth, or a mastodon, or the dodo bird or any other extinct animal gets ethically thorny. How many failures would be acceptable to get one viable mastodon? Where would the animal live? What would we feed it? Who would protect it from poachers, gawkers and treasure hunters? It is not so simple to take a long dead species, make enough of them so they don't die of isolation and lack of social stimulation and then find an environment that is close enough and safe enough compared with that which they once roamed.

In any event the most interesting aspects of genetic engineering do not involve making humans or Neanderthals or mammoths. They involve ginning up microbes to do things that we really need doing such as making clean fuel, sucking up carbon dioxide, cleaning fat out of our arteries, giving us a lot more immunity to nasty bacteria and viruses and helping us make plastics and chemicals more efficiently and cheaply.

In trying to make these kinds of microbes, you can kill all you want without fear of ethical condemnation. And if the new bug does not like the environment in which it has to exist to live well, that will be just too darn bad.

The ethical challenge of this kind of synthetic biology is that it can be used by bad guys for bad purposes. Biological weapons can be ginned up and microbes created that only infect people with certain genes that commonly associate with racial or ethnic groups.

Rather than worry about what will happen to real estate values should a new crop of "Flintstones" move in down the street, our public officials, religious groups and ethicists need to get serious about how much regulation the genetic engineering of microbes needs, how can we detect what terrorists might try to use, what sort of controls do we need to prevent accidents and who is going to pay if a bug turns out to cause more harm than good.

We love to think that the key to tomorrow lies in what humanity can be designed or empowered to do. Thus, the fascination with human cloning. In reality, at least for a long time to come, the future belongs to what we can do to design and control microbes. That is admittedly duller, but it is far better to follow a story that is true than one such as Neanderthal cloning that is pure, speculative fantasy.

Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter.

Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Arthur Caplan.

Read More..

Keppel Corp's net profit falls 22% on-year in Q4

SINGAPORE: Falling margins from building oil rigs has hit the bottomline of Keppel Corp.

Net profit for the world's leading rig builder fell 22 per cent on-year to S$305 million in the fourth quarter last year.

Still, full year profit for the conglomerate came in 15 per cent to S$2.24 billion.

Despite lower net profit in the three months ended Dec 31, Keppel Corp still declared a final dividend of 27 cents per share.

As part of its 45th anniversary, Keppel Corp is handing out more goodies to its shareholders.

The company has proposed to distribute one Keppel REIT unit for every five Keppel Corp shares.

That is about 27.4 cents per share based on Keppel REIT's closing price of S$1.37 on Thursday.

Together with the interim dividend of 18 cents, total distribution for 2012 will be 72.4 cents per share.

Keppel Corp said the lower net profit was partly due to lower contributions from its offshore and marine unit.

Offshore and Marine's contribution was 12 per cent lower from a higher base in 2011 when margins were at record highs. It contributes to half of Keppel Corp's net profits.

"Keen rivalry from Chinese and Korean yards have suppressed prices and squeezed margins on newbuilds," said Choo Chiau Beng, chief executive officer at Keppel Corp. "In 2013, we will be completing a record of 22 newbuild units."

Analysts remained upbeat of Keppel's prospects going forward.

They say their financial results still outperformed market expectations.

Keppel Corp expects crude oil prices to stay above US$100 per barrel, supporting the need for more global exploration and production.

But global challenges like the slower US economy and the eurozone crisis from last year will continue to pose uncertainties for Keppel Corp's business.

Keppel Corp's property arm, led by the listed Keppel Land, boosted the group's earnings.

Net profit for the property division was 2.5 times higher than in 2011, offsetting the lower earnings from business in the offshore and marine, and infrastructure.

But Keppel Corp does not expect its property arm to perform better this year.

This is because recognition from sales of completed units at its development Reflections at Keppel Bay is expected to be lower this financial year.

- CNA/xq

Read More..

North Korea makes new threats against U.S.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• NEW: North Korea is upset by a recent U.N. security council resolution, an analyst says


• Pyongyang says it plans a new nuclear test and further long-range rocket launches


• These are part of an "all-out action" targeting the U.S., it says


• North Korea has conducted two previous nuclear tests, in 2006 and 2009

Seoul, South Korea (CNN) -- North Korea said Thursday that it plans to carry out a new nuclear test and more long-range rocket launches, all of which it said are a part of a new phase of confrontation with the United States.

The North's National Defense Commission said the moves would feed into an "upcoming all-out action" that would target the United States, "the sworn enemy of the Korean people."

Read more: U.N. Security Council slams North Korea, expands sanctions

Carried by the state media, the comments are the latest defiant flourish from the reclusive North Korean regime, whose young leader Kim Jong Un has upheld his father's policy of pursuing a military deterrent and shrugging off international pressure.

The defense commission statement follows a United Nations Security Council resolution on Tuesday that the United States pushed for, condemning a recent recent rocket launch by North Korea and expanded existing sanctions.

Read more: North Korea silences doubters, raises fears with rocket launch

The North's angry statement "should have been the expected outcome" from the U.N. decision, said Daniel Pinkston, senior analyst for the International Crisis Group covering Northeast Asia.

"I think they are completely outraged and insulted by it," he said.

Read more: N. Korea's launch causes worries about nukes, Iran and the Pacific

North Korea, which often issues bellicose statements in its state media, said Thursday that it rejected all Security Council resolutions concerning it.

It described this week's resolution as "the most dangerous phase of the hostile policy toward the DPRK," using the abbreviated version of its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Read more: U.S. official: North Korea likely deceived U.S., allies before launching rocket

Analyst: Threat meant as a deterrence

The threats toward the United States, a constant theme in the North's propaganda, have more to do with deterrence than a desire for full conflict, Pinkston said.

"I don't believe they have the capability, the intention or the will to invade or destroy the United States," he said. "They wish to deter interference from the U.S. or any outside powers."

Read more: North Korea's rocket launches cost $1.3 billion

North Korea's successful rocket launch last month nonetheless changed the strategic calculations for the United States, showing that the North's missile program is advancing despite an array of heavy sanctions imposed on it.

Analysts say it still has a lot of work to do to master the technology necessary to mount a nuclear warhead on missile or accurately target it.

Read more: South Korean officials: North Korean rocket could hit U.S. mainland

At the same time, Pyongyang has been hinting for a while that a new nuclear test could be in the cards.

Just before the North sent out its latest hostile statement Thursday, a U.S. State Department official was telling reporters in Seoul that Washington hoped that Pyongyang wouldn't go ahead.

Read more: Huge crowds gather in North Korean capital to celebrate rocket launch

"We think that that would be a mistake, obviously," said Glyn Davies, the U.S. special envoy on North Korea. "We call on North Korea, as does the entire international community, not to engage in any further provocations."

North Korea has carried out two previous nuclear tests, in 2006 and 2009, both of which were condemned by the U.N.

Pyongyang didn't say Thursday when exactly it would carry out a third test, but it could happen "at any time," according to Pinkston.

He said that it was hard for anybody outside the North Korean nuclear sector to know if the country is technically ready to carry out the test, but that politically, "it seems an appropriate time."

Demands unlikely to sway North

South Korean defense officials said last year that they believed the North had been in a position to carry out a new test whenever leaders in Pyongyang gave the green light.

North Korea's nuclear program is "an element of threat to peace not only for Northeast Asia but also for the world," Park Soo-jin, deputy spokeswoman for the South Korean Unification Ministry said Thursday.

"North Korea should immediately stop its nuclear test and other provocation and should choose a different path by cooperating with the international community," Park said.

That appears unlikely at this stage, though.

After a failed long-range rocket launch in April, North Korea ignored international condemnation and carried out a second attempt last month. That one succeeded in putting a satellite in orbit, Pyongyang's stated objective.

But the launch was widely considered to be a test of ballistic missile technology. And it remains unclear if the satellite, which the North insists is for peaceful purposes, is functional.

Both North Korea's previous nuclear tests took place weeks or months after long-range rocket launches.

Those tests were carried out under the rule Kim Jong Il, the father of the current leader, and the man who channeled huge amounts of money into North Korea's nuclear and missile development programs.

Kim Jong Il died in December 2011 after 17 years in power, during which the North Korean people became increasingly impoverished and malnourished.

Economically, the country relies heavily on trade with its major ally, China.

CNN's K.J. Kwon reported from Seoul, and Jethro Mullen from Hong Kong. CNN's David Hawley in Seoul contributed to this report.

Read More..

Romney to be honored Friday at D.C. luncheon

Mitt Romney will make it to Washington, D.C. for inauguration week after all.

The 2012 GOP presidential nominee and his wife Ann are scheduled to attend a luncheon in their honor Friday at Washington's J.W. Marriott hotel, National Journal reported this afternoon. The reception will be hosted by two of Romney's biggest campaign fundraisers: Virginia philanthropist Catherine Reynolds and hotel tycoon Bill Marriott, Jr.

Romney, a longtime friend to the Marriott family, serves on Marriott International's board of directors. While on the trail, he and his traveling staff stayed almost exclusively at Marriott hotels.

Having opted to spend Inauguration Day at his home in La Jolla, Calif., on Monday, Romney became the first presidential nominee since Michael Dukakis in 1989 to not attend the ceremonial event. But he's made at least one appearance in the nation's capital since the election: Several weeks following his loss, he enjoyed a lunch of white turkey chili with President Obama at the White House.

Read More..

Pentagon to Allow Women in Combat

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta will lift a longstanding ban on women serving in combat, according to senior defense officials.

The services have until this May to come up with a plan to implement the change, according to a Defense Department official.

That means the changes could come into effect as early as May, though the services will have until January 2016 to complete the implementation of the changes.

"We certainly want to see this executed responsibly but in a reasonable time frame, so I would hope that this doesn't get dragged out," said former Marine Capt. Zoe Bedell, who joined a recent lawsuit aimed at getting women on the battlefield.

The military services also will have until January 2016 to seek waivers for certain jobs -- but those waivers will require a personal approval from the secretary of defense and will have to be based on rationales other than the direct combat exclusion rule.

The move to allow women in combat, first reported by the Associated Press, was not expected this week, although there has been a concerted effort by the Obama administration to further open up the armed forces to women.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff unanimously recommended in January to Secretary Panetta that the direct combat exclusion rule should be lifted.

"I can confirm media reports that the secretary and the chairman are expected to announce the lifting of the direct combat exclusion rule for women in the military," said a senior Defense Department official. "This policy change will initiate a process whereby the services will develop plans to implement this decision, which was made by the secretary of defense upon the recommendation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff."

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Martin Dempsey sent Panetta a memo earlier this month entitled, "Women in Service Implementation Plan."

Adek Berry/AFP/Getty Images

Soaring With the First Woman Fighter Jet Commander Watch Video

Instant Index: Divers Save Dolphin; Orangutans Play With iPads Watch Video

Extreme Cold Takes Its Toll on Freezing Nation Watch Video

"The time has come to rescind the direct combat exclusion rule for women and to eliminate all unnecessary gender-based barriers to service," the memo read.

"To implement these initiatives successfully and without sacrificing our warfighting capability or the trust of the American people, we will need time to get it right," he said in the memo, referring to the 2016 horizon.

Women have been officially prohibited from serving in combat since a 1994 rule that barred them from serving in ground combat units. That does not mean they have been immune from danger or from combat.

As Martha Raddatz reported in 2009, women have served in support positions on and off the frontlines in Iraq and Afghanistan, where war is waged on street corners and in markets, putting them at equal risk. Hundreds of thousands of women deployed with the military to those two war zones over the past decade. Hundreds have died.

READ MORE: Female Warriors Engage in Combat in Iraq, Afghanistan

"The reality of the battlefield has changed really since the Vietnam era to where it is today," said Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., a former military helicopter pilot who lost both her legs in combat. "Those distinctions on what is combat and what is not really are falling aside. So I think that after having seen women, men, folks who -- cooks, clerks, truck drivers -- serve in combat conditions, the reality is women are already in combat."

Woman have been able to fly combat sorties since 1993. In 2010, the Navy allowed them on submarines. But lifting restrictions on service in frontline ground combat units will break a key barrier in the military.

READ MORE: Smooth Sailing for First Women to Serve on Navy Submarines

READ MORE: Female Fighter Pilot Breaks Gender Barriers

Panetta's decision will set a January 2016 deadline for the military service branches to argue that there are military roles that should remain closed to women.

In February 2012 the Defense Department opened up 14,500 positions to women that had previously been limited to men and lifted a rule that prohibited women from living with combat units.

Panetta also directed the services to examine ways to open more combat roles to women.

However, the ban on direct combat positions has remained in place.

Read More..

Benghazi blame-game is useless

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

Hillary Clinton through the years

<<

<

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

>

>>

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Anthony Cordesman: Questions for Hillary Clinton on Benghazi attack inevitable, important


• But political blame game useless, a discouraging message to diplomats, military advisers, he says


• He says in hindsight, warnings, pleas for support mistakenly make crisis seem obvious


• Writer: U.S. must focus forward: encourage, support risk-takers doing crucial work in field

Editor's note: Anthony H. Cordesman holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Follow CSIS on Twitter.

(CNN) -- Politics are politics, and partisan congressional challenges over the death of Ambassador Chris Stevens and other Americans in Benghazi, Libya, last September were inevitable.

But while some of the questions Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was asked in her appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee bordered on politics at their worst, some represented democracy at its best: A legitimate challenge of how the government works. The fact is, we do need to ask serious questions about the way our diplomats function, how they are deployed and protected.

In her responses, Clinton took responsibility, as the top official in every department always must. The question now, however, is what, if anything, will we really learn from the events that led to the deaths of Stevens and his colleagues?

Anthony H. Cordesman

Do we actually learn something from their courage and sacrifice, and the similar experience of other American diplomats and officers that have faced similar attacks in the past? Or do we go on playing a pointless blame game, creating a climate that discourages our diplomats, U.S. military advisory teams and intelligence officers from taking necessary risks -- and relies even more on fortifying our embassies.

Three lessons here. The first: Virtually every post mortem that relies on the blame game has the same result. There is always someone who asked for more resources and warned of the risk before the event. There are always enough intelligence indicators so that once you go back -- knowing the pattern of actual events -- it becomes possible to predict the past with 20-20 hindsight.

The problem is that the post mortems and hearings tend to be useless. Every prudent security officer has always asked for more; the indicators that could provide warning with 20-20 hindsight will still be buried in a flood of other reporting that warns of crises that don't take place; U.S. officials will still have to deal with what intelligence experts call "noise" -- the vast amount of reporting and other data that make it impossible to sort out the right information until the event actually occurs and the patterns are known. All of this makes it hard to know what request or warning ever matters.

Opinion: Algeria hostage crisis shows jihadists on rise

Yes, intelligence and warning can always be improved if the post mortem is realistic and objective. But the resulting improvements will never be enough. No one will ever assess all the risks correctly, U.S. diplomats and other Americans will be vulnerable when they operate in a hostile environment, and risk-taking will remain inevitable.

The second lesson is that we cannot deal with crises like the political upheavals in the Arab world, or the more direct threats that countries like Iran and North Korea can pose, unless our diplomats and military advisers take risks -- and more casualties -- in the process.

Stevens and those around him did what had to be done. These are the teams that can help lead unstable countries towards democracy and stability. They are the crucial to our counterterrorism efforts in the field and to building up the military security capabilities of developing states. They are key to uniting given factions, creating effective governance, and persuading states to move toward development and greater concern for human rights.

They can only be effective if they are on the scene, work with the leaders and factions involved, and often go into harms way where there are terrorist and military threats. Like Stevens, they cannot wait for perfect security, stay in a safe area, or minimize risks and deal with the realities of Libya, filled with local power struggles, extremist elements and potential threats.

We need risk-takers. We need them in any country that is going through the kind of upheavals taking place in Libya, as well as in countries where our enemies operate, and semi-war zones like Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen. We need diplomats, U.S. military advisory teams, and intelligence officers that reach far beyond our embassies and go into high risk zones. We need to reward and honor those risk-takers, not those who shelter in safety and avoid the risks they should take or fear their career will be damaged if anyone is killed or hurt.

Opinion: Algeria crisis is a wakeup call for America

The third lesson is that we do need to steadily strengthen our ability to provide secure mobility, better intelligence, better communications, and better protection for those diplomats, U.S. military advisory teams and intelligence officers. We need to be able to better provide emergency help to those American NGO personnel and businessmen who take similar risks.

We need both an administration and a Congress that look beyond the blame game and understand that some things are worth spending money on. We need them to understand that what we once called the Arab Spring is clearly going to be the Arab Decade, and we face different but equally real risks in the field in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

It is far better -- and cheaper even, in the medium term -- to fund strong U.S. country teams, military advisers, counterterrorism teams and development efforts than to let nations collapse, to let extremists take over, to lose allies, and see American NGOs and businesses unable to operate.

We need to see what new methods and investments can protect our people in the field and reduce the risks they should be taking. The answer may be special communications, intelligence system, helicopters and armored vehicles, emergency response teams and new career security personnel to replace contractors and foreign nationals.

What the answer is not is partisan blame, risk avoidance, punishing those who do take risks for the result, and failing to make the improvements in security for risk takers -- while building larger fortress embassies. If you want to honor the Americans lost in the line of duty, focus on the future and not the past.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Anthony Cordesman

Read More..

Japan presses Algeria for answers as toll hits nine

ALGIERS: A senior Japanese official met Algeria's prime minister on Wednesday to press for an explanation of the gas plant siege, as Tokyo confirmed the deaths of two more nationals, taking its toll to nine.

Senior Vice Foreign Minister Shunichi Suzuki arrived aboard a government jet that is to repatriate the bodies of those known to have been killed in the hostage crisis, along with the seven Japanese who survived.

Tokyo announced late Wednesday that it knew for sure that nine Japanese were killed after Islamist gunmen overran the desert facility. One Japanese citizen remains unaccounted for.

"Unfortunately, we have been able to confirm two more deaths," said Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga. "The Japanese government expresses sincere condolences to the families and people concerned."

"The use of violence cannot be tolerated for any reason. We firmly condemn acts of terror," he said adding the government would do its utmost to confirm the fate of the final missing person.

Seventeen Japanese were at the facility in In Amenas when jihadists struck last Wednesday at the start of a four-day siege that left dozens of foreigners dead. Seven of them made it to safety.

Suzuki carried a letter to Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika from Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Suga told reporters in Tokyo earlier.

As well as Prime Minister Abdelmalek Saleki, Suzuki also met Foreign Minister Mourad Medelci, Japan's Kyodo News reported, citing Tokyo's foreign ministry.

Japan has asked Algeria to fully investigate events at the gas plant and exactly how individuals died, Suga said in Tokyo.

"Algeria has promised to cooperate as much as possible," he said.

Algeria has said 37 foreigners of eight different nationalities and an Algerian were killed in the siege, which ended on Saturday.

Several people are still missing and the bodies of others are so badly charred that they have not been identified.

Wednesday's visit came as it emerged that Britain, Japan, the United States and other countries whose nationals were caught up in the events at the In Amenas plant issued a joint demarche to Algeria last Friday.

A demarche is a formal diplomatic move in which a country's stance is conveyed in person -- rather than by note -- to another government.

In a conference telephone call, vice foreign minister Minoru Kiuchi told foreign minister Medelci that Tokyo wanted Algiers to do all it could to protect captives.

"Japan is strongly concerned about acts that put the lives of the hostages at risk, and it is regrettable that the Algerian government pressed military rescue operations," he said, according to the foreign ministry.

Japan was among the more forthright of nations as the hostage crisis unfolded, summoning Algiers' ambassador to demand answers and to push for military restraint as armed forces surrounded the plant.

The Japanese plane's arrival in Algiers came as Tokyo announced it was shutting its embassy in neighbouring Mali, evacuating staff and urging its nationals there to leave because of the deteriorating security situation.

The kidnappers claimed they launched their attack in protest at Algeria's complicity in a French military campaign against Islamists in Mali.

The Japanese death toll in Algeria -- the highest in a terror attack since Al-Qaeda crashed airliners into New York's Twin Towers when 24 Japanese died -- has shaken a country not accustomed to its citizens being made targets abroad.

There has been blanket media coverage of events half a world away and anguished demands for more to be done to protect Japanese working in trouble spots, including beefing up spy networks.

Kyodo on Wednesday said Suga indicated Tokyo's willingness to consider increasing the number of defence attaches at Japanese embassies to strengthen the country's ability to gather information.

"I am aware of the need. We need to think about the most effective (crisis-response) measures," Suga said.

-AFP/ac

Read More..